Skip to main content

About your Search

20121006
20121014
STATION
CSPAN 42
LANGUAGE
English 42
Search Results 0 to 41 of about 42 (some duplicates have been removed)
." he recently wrote a long piece comparing the technology agendas of the two candidates. thank you for joining us, mr. smith. >> in the tech community, there are many verticals. they are all competing with each other. what are these companies looking for in the agendas of both candidates right now as far as clues for what might, head? obviously telecom issues are not something that often pop up on the campaign trail. where are the companies looking for clues as to what the agendas will be? >> i think ideally what they should be looking for is a common understanding of the rules of the road and the ability to enter the marketplace and compete with one another. i think part of the problem, and it is a real problem, when the regulators try to manage competition, one of the incentives is to become rent seekers and try to manage the regulatory environment rather than looking to consumer demand business models and engaging that way. i think what they are looking for is this certainty in what the rules of the road are, to the maximum extent possible, and rules that do not interfere with t
and an obstacle. >> you mentioned some earlier in the business is technology and metal side of things. -- medical side of things. the chinese have a 40-year plan for medical technology and innovation. we cannot have a 40 day plan here in washington. >> in the health care bill we say everybody else in the world would celebrate that and say how to expand our lead globally? what do we do? we hit the medical industry with billions of dollars of new taxes. the fda slows down approval by at least two years an additional comparison. go compete in cd can still be leaders in the world. pretty tough to do. >> the health care bill is a perfect example of the government getting in the way. thingk about dictating to an interest company everything. -- ask insurance company, every dollar you spend you must only spend 15% on administrative costs. we the government will decide that on your behalf. there's not a better example anything that has happened and the health care bill when comes to the government being in the way of businesses and entrepreneurs. >> you have all outlined the worst-case scenario. we mentio
should take a forward thinking approach and a look at more technologically neutral, but regulatory way of thinking about some of the services. when it comes to fiber to plummet, we should not think of it in the same way as we thought of copper wire monopolies back in the 1970's. we should think about fiber providers. >> do you think your fellow commissioners would think the same way? >> it depends on the issue. some issues we agree and some we did not. it does not have to deal with the fcc directly. governor brown in california assigned -- making sure that internet protocols would remain free from regulation. that was a bipartisan group coming together saying we want to have an ovation and we want to incentivize investment in that next -- an ovation and we want to incentivize assessment and the next generation. >> joining our conversation is one of our guest reporters. >> let us talk a bit more about communication. you were just mentioning -- do you think in a few years tech companies will be competitive with cable companies in wire line access? >> i think so. there has been an increas
despite the availability of 21st century technology. everybody is automating everything and it's very slow. you look at the demographics of the federal workforce, they are aging. attrition would take care of a lot of this if it could be accompanied by rigorous management. president obama, prior to becoming president, the largest management he had was [ indiscernible.] >> i think that was a plug. the gentleman with the red tide. let's look for the microphone. >> i am with northstar policy navigation and james callan associates. we have enormous potential in the united states to develop our energy resources. it seems a lot of it is a communications challenge. when you have a lease it does not mean you will find oil. var, we talk about it having big reserves. it takes a long while. how do we communicate that to the average citizen? that will be the key to have a sound energy policy that can benefit all americans. >> the chamber is very active in politics, but we don't do presidential policy. i will refer to something that candidate romney said the other day about energy. he said you spend all
a future. persistent technology here in western massachusetts, this is a real opportunity for the future. only if there is a well-educated work force. that starts and home school, on into community colleges, and on into universities. i want to say this is about priorities. that is how i see it. there will not be a single, magic bullet. what the priorities. students will have to pick up more of the costs of student loans. twice, senator brown voted to let students rates double. why? it would have forced to pay for it closing a loophole used by millionaires. it is called the newt gingrich loophole. what are your priorities? protecting loopholes for millionaires or college education? >> great question. the cost of education is out of sight. we need to have an educated student population. my youngest daughter graduated. i understand. one of the largest driving forces behind the high cost of education is administrative costs. professor war makes about $350 thousand to teach a course. she got a zero interest loan and gets perks. it is interesting. kids are forced to go out and borrow money at
over them. having a technological advantage. having a military advantage. they are not going to accept that. i think the reason our policy is prevention is because we understand what the consequences will be if we do not succeed in maintaining this. that is the point about containment. containment does not prevent the saudis for making this decision to go ahead and do this. and our ability to persuade them along the lines of, look, you can count on our insurance. i said before, the obama administration would be the third american investors and that says they cannot have this. right after the acquired this, we are going to go in and say, never mind, you can accept our insurance. they are not going to accept the insurance because they have already seen that what we said was not going to hold. the reason is so important to have prevention as an objective is that containment will fail if it comes to with least that measure. >> daniel, quickly, because i want to get to mike on the title of this report and what you think it implies in terms of policy. but quickly, steve referenced the studie
. obviously, it will take time to change when things are so polarized. but with the new technology of the nets, where everybody has access, they can generally addressed this as an offsetting factor. is certainly does not need more money. we know that. but if i can do whatever i want with as many people as i can reach -- that is different again, and i like to quote from jefferson. it does make it different. ben franklin or somebody had to set that into print. now you really have an on limited ability to reach as many people who will read it. -- it really does have an unlimited ability to reach as many people who will read. >> the net is different from the newspaper. on the net, in infinite number of people could read your blog post. the difference is no one will come to your blog post unless you put money behind it. there are similar barriers. you could do of viral thing and it could take off. but the candidate, you're printing press is now has valuable as the future printing press because you have access. is a little more difficult. >> i thought you were going to say we took a murky topic and
and great aircraft carrier. -- this great aircraft carrier. this ship and the technology that is on display at this museum attest to one of the central achievement of the united states in late 20th- century. our ability to project power and strength across the land, across the high seas, across the skies, and across our space. we have secured those domains. securing them to help ensure that they were used to advance peace and prosperity. there were not used to it is with that same goal in mind today. we have to addressing a domain that we must secure to have peace and prosperity in the world of tomorrow. cyberspace has transformed our way of life, providing two billion people across the world with instant access to information coming to communication, to economic opportunities. cyberspace is the new frontier. full possibilities to a dance security and prosperity in the 21st century. and yet these possibilities also come with new perils and new dangers. the internet is open. it is highly accessible, as it should be. but that also presents a new terrain for warfare. it is the battlefield of t
there in the future. science, technology, and space offering technology to everybody, all the you -- all of the young ones coming up. ronald reagan is clearly the strongest leader of the free world. i will be honest with you. it is a joy to serve with a president who does not apologize for the united states of america. mr. mondale on the other hand has one idea. go out and tax the american people. he wants to wipe out the one protection that those of the lowest end of the economic scale have protecting them against being rammed into higher and higher tax brackets. we owe our country too much to go back to that kind of an approach. i would like to say something to the young people. i know what it is to have a dream and to have a job and to work hard to really participate and to the american dream. some of your finishing high school and college, some of your starting off in the workplace. we want america oppose the greatest grift -- america's greatest griffeift. it is absolutely essential that we guarantee the young people that the they will not know the agony of war. gift, opportunity and peace. we mu
the technology by investing in clean coal technology. we should be creating jobs. john mccain has voted 20 times against funding alternative energy sources and thinks, i guess, the only answer is drill, drill, drill. drill we must, but it will take 10 years for one drop of oil to come out of any of the wells that are going to begun to be drilled. in the meantime, we're all going to be in real trouble. >> let me clear something up, senator mccain has said he supports caps on carbon emissions. senator obama has said he supports clean coal technology, which i don't believe you've always supported. >> i have always supported it. that's a fact. >> well, clear it up for us, both of you, and start with governor palin. >> yes, senator mccain does support this. the chant is "drill, baby, drill." and that's what we hear all across this country in our rallies because people are so hungry for those domestic sources of energy to be tapped into. they know that even in my own energy-producing state we have billions of barrels of oil and hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of clean, green natural gas. and we're
. i think -- i have a high degree of confidence in technological ability to move the funds right upward. >> ted truman? >> i thank you. ted truman from peterson institute for international economic. i thank you for your remarks which i think probably qualifies as one of the more sophisticated presentsations at brookings the last year. -- presentations at brookings the last year. my is a criticism you didn't mention. as an actual economist. that is the impact of this -- a, the impact of this on the rest of the world. and whether the in general, and whether in some sense a channel that you left out was the exchange rate effect. there is some suspicion, i think, in the world in general that in fact what you talked about was completely irrelevant and it's all about weakening the dollar. exporting unemployment, whatever you want to call it. and then the other part of it is you're also exporting at the price of inflation to parts of the world that don't want it. i would be interested in your response to that kind of criticism of this polcy. >> well, i mean first of all i will acknowled
. >> thank you for mentioning washingtonwatch.com. i see some of the biggest technology blockers are constantly scraping and striving for mention of their sites. that would not seem to hurt very much. i appreciate daniel's work in the work of the sunlight foundation and his perspective on things. it is important to give thing some perspective. i was interested of the mention of the "read the bill" push. that phrase is not really mean that people literally wants, though they may think they want congress to sit down and and read the bill, is about a broader thing across the country. it is part of a broader push that these are a part appeared when i look at the history of this issue it goes back to the election of president obama and the real energy he brought on the campaign trail in 2008 to the question of transparency and the good government we all in addition. from my perspective by about 2010 that energy had dissipated. a lot of efforts have gone toward a lot of things. we were not seeing that dramatic transformation that a lot of us can visualize. it was a lot happening very m
what the technology was, so they can get the most out of it. whether it was universal secondary education, and then it was universal post secondary education. second, we have the world's best infrastructure. roads, railroads, third, we have the world's most immigration policy. so we get the most energy etic and talented im-- energetic and talented immigration. fourth, we have the best rules. lastly, we have the most government-funded research. we push the balance on science and technology, so our best innovators are here. in education, we now, well, roughly 30% of high school students drop out of high school. we used to ld the world in college graduates. we no longer do that. on infrastructure, according to the american society of civil engineers, we are now $2 trillion in deficits in terms of infrastructure. a great education, and get the hell out of our country. we are fighting on each one of these issues that are so vital to our greatest strength. i don't think we can remedy this . and on budget-funded research, it looks wike an e.k.g. heading for a heart attack. in terms of
. partly because it helps us build a future. persistent technology here in western massachusetts, this is a real opportunity for the future. only if there is a well- educated work force. that starts and home school, on into community colleges, and on into universities. i want to say this is about priorities. that is how i see it. there will not be a single, magic bullet. what the priorities. students will have to pick up more of the costs of student loans. twice, senator brown voted to let students rates double. why? it would have forced to pay for it closing a loophole used by millionaires. it is called the newt gingrich loophole. what are your priorities? protecting loopholes for millionaires or college education? >> great question. the cost of education is out of sight. we need to have an educated student population. my youngest daughter graduated. i understand. what those payments certainly are. one of the largest driving forces behind the high cost of education is administrative costs. professor war makes about $350 thousand to teach a course. -- professor warren makes about
of arguments made by some people saying, you know, the defense department is a major driver of technology, the defense department is what does the internet, cellphones, all these technologies. i don't know enough about it, i am not an expert on this, but i wonder if you could discuss that. is it pro-investment to spend money on the military? maybe the other argument is that if we are not wasting its money on things we don't have to spend on in terms of military systems, it might enhance technology. what is your view on that? >> my view is a two-part answer. a, the purpose of defense services broadly speaking is to defend capital against foreign aggressors, foreign to structure, both physical, human, etc. to the extent that the defense budget is too small, you might get too little investment. that is a reasonable argument. i don't think we are in that world, but that is a reasonable conceptual problem. the second point is how did we ever move from caves to buildings, from fire to telephony, etc., without a massive defense structure? some sort of under-incentive in the private sector to eng
investments in education. or clean energy. or research. and technology. we can't afford to roll back regulations on wall street banks or oil companies or insurance companies. that is not a jobs plan. it's not a plan to grow our economy. it's sure not a plan to strengthen our middle class. we have been there. we have tried that. we're not going back. we are moving forward. we've got a different view about how we create jobs and prosperity in this country. [applause] this country doesn't just succeed when just a few are doing well at the top. succeed is when the middle lass gets bigger. our economy doesn't grow from the top down. it grows from the middle out. we don't -- we don't believe that anybody's entitled to success in this country. but we do believe in opportunity. we believe in a country where hard work pays off. and responsibility is rewarded. and everybody's getting a fair shot. and everybody's doing their fair share. and everybody's playing by the same rules. believehe country we in. that's what we've been fighting for for the last four years. that's what we are going to put
we can afford a piece of technological elegance like that. i'd strike that sort of thing from the ticket. i don't know how many people have ridden the concorde, not many, but i voted against it, said it would be a financial disaster and it's been just that. >> senator. >> so, those are the types of things that i would work on. >> senator quayle? >> the way we're going to reduce this budget deficit, and it is a challenge to make sure that it is reduce, is first to stick to the gramm-rudman targets. the gramm-rudman targets have worked. we've reduced the federal budget deficit $70 billion. senator bentsen voted against gramm-rudman, the very tool that has been used to bring the federal budget deficit down. we're going to need all the tools possible to bring this federal budget deficit down. we need the tools of a line item veto. a line item veto that 43 governors in this country have, but not the president of the united states. the president of the united states needs to have a line item veto. when congress goes ahead and puts into appropriations bills unrequested and unnecessar
, technology. that is not a plan to grow the economy. that is not change. we have been there. we have tried that. we are not going back. we are moving forward. that is why i am running for a second term as president of the united states. [applause] look -- we have got a different view about how you bring jobs and prosperity to america. the strong economy does not trickle down from the top. it grows from a thriving middle- class, and folks working hard to get into the middle-class. i think it is time our tax code stopped rewarding companies that ship jobs overseas. let us reward small businesses and manufacturing here in ohio, products made in america. that is the choice in this election. i believe we can create more jobs by controlling more of our own energy. after 30 years of inaction, we raised fuel standards. by the middle of the next decade, your cars and trucks would go twice as far on a gallon of gas. today, the u.s. is less dependent on foreign oil than at any time in two decades. it is time to move forward. my plan would cut our oil imports in half, and invest in the clean energy cr
of the above, alternative fuels, wind, tide, solar, natural gas, clean coal technology. all of these things we can do as americans and we can take on this mission and we can overcome it. my friends, some of this $700 billion ends up in the hands of terrorist organizations. as far as health care is concerned, obviously, everyone is struggling to make sure that they can afford their premiums and that they can have affordable and available health care. that's the next issue. but we can do them all at once. there's no -- and we have to do them all at once. all three you mentioned are compelling national security requirements. >> i'm trying to play by the rules that you all established. one minute for discussion. senator obama, if you would give us your list of priorities, there are some real questions about whether everything can be done at once. >> we're going to have to prioritize, just like a family has to prioritize. now, i've listed the things that i think have to be at the top of the list. energy we have to deal with today, because you're paying $3.80 here in nashville for gasoline, and it c
. thanks to technology reform, they should be fixed. we should be punished for what we did wrong. the punishment should fit the crime so we can move on. they feel like it was old testament justice. including the bank that failed, they have given a lot of money. there is some truth to that. i cannot make up what they did and did not do. there were people who destroyed the company's and virtually brought this down to its knees. it causes me off, too. >> just to defend the old testament for a second. the idea was that the punishment should not exceed the crime, so that was a progressive innovation at the time. [laughter] >> i did not think of it that way, but ok. >> about four years ago, the chief security officer told us there had been up to 1 million attempted intrusions', cyber intrusions', in one day. how concerned are you about the cyber threat, cyber crimes, and cyber terrorism? >> we get hundreds of thousands a day. we have these major security centers and we work with big government around the world to protect ourselves. they're flooding the lines and a lot of these are comi
that google will not continue to face lots of competitive rivalry from innovations in search technology. i will say a few words about the doctrine. the unicorn of antitrust law. everybody thinks they know it looks like a no one has actually seen one in the class. the idea is that there is some facility that is hard to duplicate. the owner of the facility is excluding competitors from using its and there are a few other elements to the test. in a case of internet search, the asserted facility is placed on google's page. but there's only limited amount of space that can come up on the page. so it is not possible that every competitor that thinks it is essential to be on the page can be accommodated. it is not clear how such a remedy would be feasible even if he thought it was necessary to do this in order to improve competition to benefit consumers. the u.s. courts have been very reluctant to buy into the essential facilities theory. the supreme court has said it has never endorsed the idea. it is very unlikely that an antitrust claim against google would ever succeed in court. i think i bet
to identify what ways the fcc could establish a regulatory framework in the communications technology sector. be a leader in that job creation and economic growth. it is one of the more dynamic parts of the economy. if you look at the statistics, job growth and economic growth has slowed in that department. identified three areas where the fcc could do more with respect to the it sector. to the it sector.
have over 200,000 defense and technology jobs. rather than cutting back, we need to make sure we have a strong economy, a strong military. as far as our spending, i disagree with the president giving money -- if they cannot protect our embassies, they should not be getting our money. do not buy a friends. >> isn't there is 60-second rebuttal? >> no, there is not. >> island that on the first one. >> i thought i did, too. >> if we were both under the impression. >> virginia seniors who rely on social security benefits are in for a lifetime of work. almost 1 million virginians receiving social security check every month. they are very polite, receiving on average about 77% of their total monthly income from this alone. an aging society will put strain on the program into the future. how would you protect social security for today's seniors and a strengthened it for future generations. >> thank you. i think we need to preserve social security for current beneficiaries as well as in the future. social security beneficiaries have for their entire lives and paid into it. they ought to get th
-- hard to regulate. it is difficult to address this emerging technology. when a patient says a madison harmed them, is that report will to the fda? we have patient confidentiality and issues about how do we deal with misleading information posted by different types of users, a consumer, and potentially another illicit actor. what we are talking about today is how and listed online pharmacies use of social media format. what led us to this is we're looking at pharmaceutical companies to see what their presence was on social media and how they are using it. academic can sometimes be behind the curve. we found a lot of pharmaceutical companies using social media. no big surprise. we just reported this last year. what we found that was very interesting is we also found illicit links to know prescription online pharmacies when we did our surges. we found about 90% of the top marketed drugs in the u.s. had illicit online pharmacy link associated with them. st of show you pictures. this is a facebook site. they are advertising no prescription drugs on line. this is a twitter post that offers
, texas. caller: what i am baffled by is how the moderators do not use the technology available to control interruptions. it seems like no matter what side is, democrat, republican, a large concern is interruptions and the perceived rudeness. the first debate, there was a clear winner. a lot of people blame the moderator for that spirit was not the moderators job to make the questions. host: you said the use of technology? what do you mean? caller: the have the ability to mute their microphones. they give them two minutes to answer, why do not they mute their microphones to make it impossible for them to interrupt. they can use the audio. they prevent the audience from clapping and laughing, but the microphones are turned off so noises on picked up in the background. they can meet these candidates said they cannot interrupt. and then the interruption and the rudeness goes away. so that when they cannot interrupt. that is part of the debate. i think the moderator both did a great job. but i think they can do a better job. host: i am going to have to let you there. i want to squeeze in one m
agents and more technology. we need to make sure our economic industry that we thrive on with agriculture, construction, it can have the labor pool that they need. we need to create an earned path to citizenship that respects the laws. one thing i would vote for would be the dream act. risking their lives for our country and for us and our freedoms. congresswoman mary bono mack has filled to lead in this example. she has voted against the dream act. >> congressman, you have one minute. >> i stance on immigration is the same as it was two years ago. it is a very logical stance on immigration. i believe we need strong interior enforcement mechanisms and i believe we need a non- amnesty program for people to use to be employed in the united states of america. let me say something about the dream act. president obama, nancy pelosi, and harry reid have the perfect trifecta. they had the senate and the white house, two years to pass comprehensive immigration reform, and they did nothing. they did not have a single bipartisan meeting at the white house. i do not support president obama did what
those investment bankers over there in four hours. i don't think we can afford a piece of technological elegance like that. i would strike that sort of thing. i don't know how many people have rid -- ridden in the con cord -- concorde, not many, but i voted against it, said it would be a financial disaster, and it's been just that. >> senator. >> so those are the types of things i would work on. >> senator quayle? >> the way we're going to reduce this budget deficit and it's a challenge to make sure that it is reduced, is first to stick to the gramm-rudman targets. the gramm--rudman targets have worked. we've reduced the federal budget deficit $70 billion. senator bentsen voted against the gramm-rudman, the very tool that has been used to bring the federal budget deficit down. we're going to need all the tools possible to bring this federal budget deficit down. we need the tools of a line item veto. a line item veto that 43 governors in this country have but not the president of the united states. >> tom brokaw, the last question for senator bentsen. >> senator bentsen, i'd ask you abo
for science and technology, georgetown day school, albert ion tine high school, halls without walls. thank you so much. we applaud you and your work. thank you so much on behalf of women and girls around the world. >> i would like to give a special shoutout to hillary clinton and the united population fund, yesterday in very high level meetings pledged nearly $50 million for a campaign to end child marriage. [applause] >> i'd like now to ask eleanor smeal to join me. i've had the great privilege of working with her for 25 years. she is one of the contemporary women's movements and one of its most recognized leaders. in 1980 she was the first to define and prove the gender gap that it existed and she has been a key force ever since to secure women's rights. please welcome eleanor smeal. [applause]. >> thank you this is quite a year for us. this is also the 25th anniversary for the feminist majority. and kathy never gets introduced in her own right. i want to introduce katherine spillar who has kept us going in so many ways and now is executive editor of "ms.." and that's not in name only, that'
worked this job before. i have the technology and experience they are seeking. after those people since june of this year -- i have been after these people since june of next year and i will start this week. i spent probably close to $1,400 to go to a job interview in north dakota. i was there for half an hour for the job interview. it cost me $1,400 round trip to go there to seek out this job. host: next up is savannah, georgia. caller: 94 cspan. i am employed. i'm from savannah, georgia. i was working in construction. the building industry went down. i looked at other options. in savannah, we have a great deal of the employment in transportation, import/export business, containers. it is booming and truck drivers are needed. in this area. i think that many people who have been unemployed in certain industries have to look at other ways to get jobs that are available. there are a lot of other jobs available. host: is it hard to get out one mindset of being in one career and going to another? caller: i have a c.l. license to be able to be in the industry i was in. i was prepared because
together with weapons of mass destruction, the deadly technologies that saddam hussein had developed and used over the years. the fact of the matter is that -- the big difference is they are not prepared to deal with states that sponsor terror. they've got a very limited view about how to use u.s. military force to defend america. we heard senator kerry say the other night that there ought to be some kind of global test before u.s. troops are deployed pre-emptively to protect the united states. that's part of a track record that goes back to the 1970's when he ran for congress the first time and said troops should not be deployed without u.n. approval. then in the mid 1980's, he ran on the basis of cutting most of our major defense programs. in 1991, he voted against desert storm. it's a consistent pattern over time of always being on the wrong side of defense issues. a little tough talk in the midst of a campaign or as part of a presidential debate cannot obscure a record of 30 years of being on the wrong side of defense issues. and they give absolute no ibbed case based on that rec
. the chairman of the house intelligence committee is warning that china's two leading technology firms pose a major security threat to the u.s. the panel says regulators should block mergers and acquisitions in the u.s. by the two companies. the results of the committee pose a yearlong investigation will be released this morning. last night, president obama doh about his performance in last week's first presidential debate, killing an audience in los angeles that included many celebrities in acting and movies, that he did not always performed flawlessly night after night, like them. -- telling the audience. the president is on a fund- raising tour of california where the cost to attend last night's dinner with $25,000 per person. republican presidential nominee mitt romney focuses on foreign policy today. he is proposing that the u.s. take a more assertive role in syria, put conditions on aid to egypt, and tighten sanctions on iran. you can hear romney's remarks on c-span radio or watch the event on c-span. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. [video clip] >> one of the t
the mission of c-span radio grown in 15 years? guest: it has changed as technology has changed. when we first went on the air in 1997, suspend a radio was available on 90.1 fm here in washington, d.c., and shortly thereafter we became available on satellite radio. as the years went on, smartphones were invented, and those apps were invented. we are now available on the android phone, the iphone, and blackberry as well. host: nancy calo, c-span radio, thank you. we will be right back. >> this government has promised and maintained the closest surveillance of the military buildup from the soviets on the island of cuba. within the last week unmistakable evidence has established the fact that a series of offensive missile sites is now in preparation on that imprisoned island. the purpose of these bases can be none other than to provide a nuclear strike capability against the western hemisphere. >> do you, ambassador, denied that the u.s.s.r. has faced and is facing is committed missiles in europe -- in cuba? yes or no care do not wait for the translation. >> historians, scholars and journalists o
a technological lead and people are skilled and able to succeed. hard-pressed states right now cannot do that. we have seen layoffs of hundreds of thousands of teachers over the last several years. gov. romney does not think we need more teachers, i do. i think that is the kind of investment or the federal government can help. it can make a difference. as a consequence we will have a better trained work force, and that will create jobs because companies want to locate in places where there is a skilled workforce. >> i love great schools. massachusetts, our schools are ranked no. one of 50 states. the key to grade schools, is great teachers. i reject the idea i do not believe in great teachers. every state should make that decision on their own. the role of government -- look behind us. the constitution and the declaration of independence. is to promote and protect the principles of those documents first. life and liberty -- we have a responsibility to protect the lives of people. i do not believe in cutting the military. i want to maintain the strength of the military. the line that says we are e
in a community and the return on investment will be huge when science and technology and engineering is in the incubators that we have here. >> hold on. >> there is this philosophy again that all jobs have to be treated by the federal government. that is why dr. carmona is comfortable party in comfortable priority, because that is the attitude of the obama administration -- that is why dr. carmona is comfortable in the democratic party. >> the fact of the matter is, i am not here to defend the obama administration. i have been an independent my entire life. i understand what businessmen are telling me. we need help. we are willing to invest, but we need roads, sanitation, clean water. that is beyond the scope of small business. infrastructure will help entrepreneur is to take risks, to hire people, we will get schools and get economic growth. >> i wonder what the founders of our country would think about this very discussion. i wonder what they would think of the federal government taxing people in arizona and then having our representatives to go to washington and bad for our money
it comes to other functions of state government. information technology, we are way behind in the hampshire. we need to come up with a public private partnership to bring us to the modern age. but how to reform state government. i am not for taking over medicare, as my opponent says. i'm about to have your best based solutions when it comes to health care. >> and next question comes from clay from the concord monitor. >> and doubling back to medicaid just for a moment. thanks to the recent supreme court ruling on obamacare, states have a say on whether to accept federal dollars to extend their programs. as you just mentioned, you backed excepting such money if it is in the form of a block grant. can you assure you hampshire residents that if you accept the money that it would actually increase insurance coverage? >> actually, i can. my approach, this is very important for job creation. health care is one of the major issues that is stopping businesses from expanding new businesses from coming to new hampshire. largely because of the things we have done to ourselves. we need an overall healt
Search Results 0 to 41 of about 42 (some duplicates have been removed)